For example, "We will stop the radical indoctrination of our students and restore patriotic education to our schools." What does "racial indoctrination" refer to? What does "patriotic education" refer to? I have a strong idea, but that's just my opinion.
How about we just teach kids to think for themselves? To learn to verify things they read and how to identify a good source.
Have you tried? This is something that the majority of people will not do no matter how much you tell them they should. They don't want to, and many can't.
Just because something sounds right/wrong doesn't mean it is. There isn't always an easy answer. "I don't know" is preferable to "simple but wrong".
Do you know any datasets that provide good unbiased definitions of these terms that candidates use? Let me know if you do, I can index them and add to the UI.
Rather than incorporating "datasets that provide good unbiased definitions of these terms that candidates use", allow users (ideally quality controlled in some magical way) to annotate specific words and phrases, and attach comments to them (like: "We will stop the radical indoctrination of our students and restore patriotic education to our schools." What does "racial indoctrination" refer to? What does "patriotic education" refer to?) This would then make the site not just a useful informational tool, but also add a social media meta-conversation type of layer on top - in the case of the above comments, revealing to other users the vacuousness of political rhetoric, which a lot of people seem to take at face value, as a sincere and honest representation of true (as opposed to truthy) intent. Politics is largely disingenuous theatre imho, I think it would be healthy for this to be pointed out to people more often.
Obviously, there are all sorts of problems with this, one of which is that cynical people like me would use it for shitposting and that sort of thing. To that, I would suggest forcing a user to choose some sort of a ~perspective from which they are posting, and to be honest and take things seriously (and enforce this with an iron fist) - so in my case, I would often choose "Hyperbolic Cynicism" and treat the whole thing like the mockery that I perceive it to be (here I mean: both candidates, and the entire system). And other users could have the option of filtering out idiot comments like mine (or, choose to only see comments of this kind, or whatever the individual prefers).
And then in addition to speeches, you could also host various news articles, and let people do the same thing. Yes, there is noteworthy overlap with Reddit and many other sites, but there's also plenty of leeway for significant differentiation.
Of course, this would significantly change (and add risk to) the nature of your website, so perhaps you could do a completely different, renamed/unaffiliated version of it and tries this angle out.
Anyways, just an idea. Overall, I think it's a good idea and really nicely done, good job.
In this case, Trump's speech makes the assumption that his audience sees themselves as "patriots" and subscribe to the narrative that their way of life is under attack by people who "hate America" and want to indoctrinate people to do the same. This paints the other side as being against their value system and champions their values.
The problem is, even explaining that in those terms will cause people to take exception, so it's both difficult and dangerous for a website to do so and remain "factual" or "neutral".
Take a look at the 5-star reviews for this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Patriots-History-United-States-Entitl...
Compared to this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Peoples-History-United-States/dp/0062...
Most people really hate it when you tell them things that run counter to their narrative, and have a hard time even seeing their narratives as biased one way or another.
In this specific case Trump is grousing about non whitewashed version of American history that include education about slavery in the US, treatment of Indian/Indigenous tribes, etc etc. and generally anything that questions America/Capitalism/Traditional Gender Roles/etc. In short close to anything vaguely progressive happening in schools counts as "radical indoctrination" for some fragments of the right side of American politics.